I keep forgetting.  Does it have something to do with weapons?

[url]http://www.foreignwire.com/phalcon.html[/url]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm

Well, I see we have another Israel hating, DU infiltrator.

Well, shilly rabbit, it cuz they gots oil! We need oil!
Oh, and their leader is a murdering criminal who supports terrorists and is trying to build a nuke.

Because it'll piss Liberals like you off to high heaven.

No other reason is needed. Just seeing you all squirm whenever the US military kicks ass and takes names is worth it!

[size=6]For the oil!!!!![/size=6]




[lol]

Training exercise.

Bilster

Ok, ok. Now let me start off with a disclaimer. I once supported what we were doing (going to do) in Iraq. No longer. When Bush started in with the "N. Korea can be settled with diplomacy" crap. If we can allow a leader of a fascist country that HAS nukes, wants to make more, and is a terrorist AS WELL to exist... Why are we being so adamant about regime change in Iraq? Where lies the difference? I voted for Bush in the last election. Its a mistake I look forward to rectifying, not just for this but the way I feel he has treated our country. NW

Tom Daschle.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Northwind: North Korea is a Communist nation, not facist.  Other than that, very good statement.  Seems not too many others have noticed this.

Oil & Israel - big factors in Iraq.  Not so with N. Korea, hence the diplomacy route, though N. Korea has nukes, is not simply perhaps/maybe/one day might have nukes.

Disclaimer: Love of my nation does not mandate love of the government currently running my nation.  In other words, I have never been to the DU website.  I love apple pie & hot dogs, but that don't mean I gotta love Bush and his cronies.  Or the Clintons or the other bullshit artists we "elect" into office.

Oh, why do I bother....

Well considering the fact we don't currently have a large military presance in the North Korea area and that we do currently have a large military build up by Iraq, it is kind of hard to force North Korea do anything other than thru diplomatic means.

Yes we can probably take both on at the same time, just not right now.  Until we have a stronger military holding in that area we must go thru diplomatic means.

Pretty simple really.

SGtar15

I say we invade just to get some really cool film footage of stuff blowing up. Thats all the reason I need.

No, the North Korea point is not a good one, it is naive and simplistic.  If North Korea wants to blackmail us with its nukes and given a worst-case scenario actually uses one in South Korea, what happens?
A lot of innocent S Koreans die, yes...but thinking from a STRATEGIC standpoint, the US doesn't lose any major resources or trading partners.  
What happens if Iraq gets a nuke and decides to use it?
Assuming they use it themselves, they have the ability to make inaccessible some of the richest supplies of oil in the world.  And if they are able to successfully use their nukes to blackmail Saudi Arabia and the rest of the oil producing nations of the Middle East, they could basically achieve control over the pricing and distribution of oil around the world.
Now a bunch of the isolationists are going to scream, "See! It's about the oil!"
No, it's about the stability.  If Iraq controls the oil, do you think that's the end of it?  That the situation will remain like that for long?
No, what's GOING to happen is that SOMEONE is going to attack Iraq because they don't want them to have that sort of control.  If we don't do it now, Israel will do it later and they will certainly respond with nukes if Iraq goes to WMDs against them.
Then you have World War III, ladies and gentlemen and I am not exaggerating.
The Iraq situation is a ticking time bomb and if we don't deal with it now while we can, it will indeed blow up in our faces.

Correctamundo!!!!!

Besides, all N. Korea wants is to be assured we wont attack. Thats easy. .

I believe there is a difference between Iraq and North Korea and that gives a reason why N. Korea can be handled diplomatically.  North Korea is very much alone and is very unpopular with it's neighbors.  That region is pretty stable now (China, Japan, S. Korea) are very unlikely to do anything that will unstablize the region, they have too much of a vested interest in keeping the status quo of the area as it currently is.  No one is going to come to the defense of N. Korea or even speak fondly of them.  Even China, their long time ally, will do little to nothing to support N. Korea, not worth it to the Chinese.  N. Korea is also very dependent on outside assistance, mainly food aid.  They are supposed to suffer a horrible famine this winter and need ours and Japan's considerable food aid to keep going.  N. Korea might talk tough, but I think when push comes to shove, N. Korea will eventually back down. They have talked tough before, and have talked of invading off and on for years.    How does 2 nuclear weapons help N. Korea?  It doesn't, not with us having so many.  N. Korea would nuke on of their neighbors and then be nuked by us in return.  I also think it's not probable that N. Korea would give a nuke to a terrorist group.
Iraq on the other hand seems to be able to be pretty independent so far and is a major cause of instability to the middle east.  Their neighbors are highly likely to listen to Saddam Huessin and come to his aid, he provides support to terrorists and would likely give more support to terrorists against us.  Iraq has a hard on for destroying us.  

It won't blow up IN OUR FACES...It will blow up our faces and the faces of our children.